Regime Change Revisited
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
the longer this goes on, the more unpopular they will be.
where? I thoroughly applaud them athough I find it curious that they waited so long.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
where? I thoroughly applaud them athough I find it curious that they waited so long.
Pretty much the world. Although the U.S. still supports them, I'm not sure they can sustain support long enough for them to finish whatever the goals of their current campaign may be. The other problem is that the more civilians you kill, the more young kids grow up to continue the legacy of Hamas. So while you may have subdued the problem short-term, you just created a future generation of Hamas supporters. Not a very good way to achieve long-term peace.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Actually, the only thing that would help is if Iran and Syria were rendered incapable of any involvment of any kind any where.
But that's not realistic, so the only alternative is to involve them in the process.
73Zeppelin wrote:
But that's not realistic, so the only alternative is to involve them in the process.
The only reason it isn't realistic is because of the inexplicable stupidity of so many in the west. Iran and Syria could both be taken down as easily as Iraq was with far less risk of insurgency simply because there would be no political entity left in the region to manage any organized and effective insurgency.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Iran and Syria were rendered incapable
By force or you got some other thoughts?
Force - its good for what ailes ya...
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
I agree with what you say.
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
Sure this will happen for some time, and then hate becomes rampant again and this cycle will start all over again.
I think this is exactly right and thus why I believe the Israeli invasion of Gaza is misguided. It will just serve to push the peace process that much further back. Both sides need to be soundly condemned by Arab leaders and the U.S. The people are just caught in the middle. I think it would help if Iran were to get invovled (and possibly Syria). They are to Hamas what the U.S. is to Israel.
73Zeppelin wrote:
peace process
what the fuck is that?
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
I agree with what you say.
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
Sure this will happen for some time, and then hate becomes rampant again and this cycle will start all over again.
I think this is exactly right and thus why I believe the Israeli invasion of Gaza is misguided. It will just serve to push the peace process that much further back. Both sides need to be soundly condemned by Arab leaders and the U.S. The people are just caught in the middle. I think it would help if Iran were to get invovled (and possibly Syria). They are to Hamas what the U.S. is to Israel.
73Zeppelin wrote:
It will just serve to push the peace process that much further back.
To the starting point or even before. You can't have peace or peace-talks until both sides have calmed down and I don't mean calmed down to the point they're not throwing everything short of nukes at each other; I mean calm as in willing to listen.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Both sides need to be soundly condemned by Arab leaders and the U.S.
Israel would simply shrug off any condemnation by any Arab state because even though it has peace with two of them, it effectively considers "Arabs" as enemy. The US on the other hand can easily lean on Israel, but I doubt the current administration, yes Dubya, I'm talking about you, will lift a finger to do anything because in my opinion it has proved its incompetence and impotence a thousandfold particularly when it come to foreign policy and especially the Middle East.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I think it would help if Iran were to get invovled (and possibly Syria). They are to Hamas what the U.S. is to Israel.
Again, Though Iran uses vernacular that supports the Palestinian militant groups and yes it does occasionally send aid to the Palestinians, it won't actively fund a Sunni group like Hamas (Syria in extension as well since the ruling party is Alawite (spelling) which is a Shi'ite denomination) unlike Hizbollah which is actively funded with millions from both Syria and Iran.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
where? I thoroughly applaud them athough I find it curious that they waited so long.
Pretty much the world. Although the U.S. still supports them, I'm not sure they can sustain support long enough for them to finish whatever the goals of their current campaign may be. The other problem is that the more civilians you kill, the more young kids grow up to continue the legacy of Hamas. So while you may have subdued the problem short-term, you just created a future generation of Hamas supporters. Not a very good way to achieve long-term peace.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I'm not sure they can sustain support long enough for them to finish whatever the goals of their current campaign may be.
Not sure about the rest of the world but they'll not lose US support as long as the rest of the world is pulling for their demise.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
But that's not realistic, so the only alternative is to involve them in the process.
The only reason it isn't realistic is because of the inexplicable stupidity of so many in the west. Iran and Syria could both be taken down as easily as Iraq was with far less risk of insurgency simply because there would be no political entity left in the region to manage any organized and effective insurgency.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Iran and Syria could both be taken down as easily as Iraq was with far less risk of insurgency simply because there would be no political entity left in the region to manage any organized and effective insurgency.
Honestly, Stan, I credited you with more insight than that. Sure we spar on many issues, but this shows me you don't know much about the region and the Religio-Politico movements in both. You can add Afghanistan, Lebanon to that pile as well.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
But that's not realistic, so the only alternative is to involve them in the process.
The only reason it isn't realistic is because of the inexplicable stupidity of so many in the west. Iran and Syria could both be taken down as easily as Iraq was with far less risk of insurgency simply because there would be no political entity left in the region to manage any organized and effective insurgency.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
taken down as easily as Iraq
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out... :rolleyes: When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc... Deposing the governments of Iran and/or Syria will result in the same thing. It will also result in the people of two more countries hating the western world. I fail to see the logic in your "plan". Alternatively, you could engage them politically and economically and probably improve relations, Middle-east stability and cooperation on Iraeal-Palestine and Iraq.
-
Iran is Shi'ite and Syria's ruling faction is Alawite (spelling?) which is a denomination of the Shi'ite sect, its very doubtful if Hamas is being funded by either. Hizbullah on the other hand is.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
Iran is Shi'ite and Syria's ruling faction is Alawite (spelling?) which is a denomination of the Shi'ite sect, its very doubtful if Hamas is being funded by either. Hizbullah on the other hand is.
Than removing them would help resolve who is doing the funding. If you remove all possible middle eastern sources of funding, than you are left with an indisputable internatoinal, non-Islamic source of funding, which could be handled without involving the people of the middle east at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
peace process
what the fuck is that?
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
what the f*** is that?
The thing that goes on in between the rocket firing and Gaza invasions.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
taken down as easily as Iraq
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out... :rolleyes: When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc... Deposing the governments of Iran and/or Syria will result in the same thing. It will also result in the people of two more countries hating the western world. I fail to see the logic in your "plan". Alternatively, you could engage them politically and economically and probably improve relations, Middle-east stability and cooperation on Iraeal-Palestine and Iraq.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out...
Sometimes I wonder if the number of dead soldiers is being reported correctly. I really do.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
taken down as easily as Iraq
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out... :rolleyes: When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc... Deposing the governments of Iran and/or Syria will result in the same thing. It will also result in the people of two more countries hating the western world. I fail to see the logic in your "plan". Alternatively, you could engage them politically and economically and probably improve relations, Middle-east stability and cooperation on Iraeal-Palestine and Iraq.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out...
Yes we do. A people became free to vote.
73Zeppelin wrote:
When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc... Deposing the governments of Iran and/or Syria will result in the same thing. It will also result in the people of two more countries hating the western world. I fail to see the logic in your "plan".
That is absolute bullshit. There are powers in that region who have everything to gain from the anarchy. They aide it, they abed it and they profit from it politically if not economically. There would certainly be more violence in the middle east if you removed the puppet masters, but it would be disorganized and impotent and largely waged between the various radical factions themselves as they fought against one another for control. Cordon off the major oil fields and let the fanatics slaughter each other. Who cares?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
It will just serve to push the peace process that much further back.
To the starting point or even before. You can't have peace or peace-talks until both sides have calmed down and I don't mean calmed down to the point they're not throwing everything short of nukes at each other; I mean calm as in willing to listen.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Both sides need to be soundly condemned by Arab leaders and the U.S.
Israel would simply shrug off any condemnation by any Arab state because even though it has peace with two of them, it effectively considers "Arabs" as enemy. The US on the other hand can easily lean on Israel, but I doubt the current administration, yes Dubya, I'm talking about you, will lift a finger to do anything because in my opinion it has proved its incompetence and impotence a thousandfold particularly when it come to foreign policy and especially the Middle East.
73Zeppelin wrote:
I think it would help if Iran were to get invovled (and possibly Syria). They are to Hamas what the U.S. is to Israel.
Again, Though Iran uses vernacular that supports the Palestinian militant groups and yes it does occasionally send aid to the Palestinians, it won't actively fund a Sunni group like Hamas (Syria in extension as well since the ruling party is Alawite (spelling) which is a Shi'ite denomination) unlike Hizbollah which is actively funded with millions from both Syria and Iran.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
but I doubt the current administration, yes Dubya, I'm talking about you, will lift a finger to do anything
With a new US President due to take office soon, with new policies and so on. I've not read any of Obama's policies regarding Israel or Palestine so I wonder if what Israel are doing now, which has the support of the present US Administration may change somewhat with a new installed US President. Is this good enough reason - the unknown - why this Israeli action is happening now as it may be difficult to do same under a new Administration. Regarding Iran and Syria, I got the impression during those Presidential debates that Obama is more willing to talk and listen. This stance might become a worry to Israel.
-
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
Iran is Shi'ite and Syria's ruling faction is Alawite (spelling?) which is a denomination of the Shi'ite sect, its very doubtful if Hamas is being funded by either. Hizbullah on the other hand is.
Than removing them would help resolve who is doing the funding. If you remove all possible middle eastern sources of funding, than you are left with an indisputable internatoinal, non-Islamic source of funding, which could be handled without involving the people of the middle east at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Yes, but you propose to do that by force which would simply create another circle of hatred and another cycle of radicalism and so on.
Stan Shannon wrote:
which could be handled without involving the people of the middle east at all.
Interesting. I'm reminded of how the US was funding Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda during the proxy war with Afghanistan, do you propose a similar tactic? I should hope not. Its been almost 8 years and NOTHING has been accomplished in Iraq and Afghanistan other than death and fueling [a lot more] hatred and calls to radicalism. Some solution.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
where? I thoroughly applaud them athough I find it curious that they waited so long.
Pretty much the world. Although the U.S. still supports them, I'm not sure they can sustain support long enough for them to finish whatever the goals of their current campaign may be. The other problem is that the more civilians you kill, the more young kids grow up to continue the legacy of Hamas. So while you may have subdued the problem short-term, you just created a future generation of Hamas supporters. Not a very good way to achieve long-term peace.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
taken down as easily as Iraq
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out... :rolleyes: When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc... Deposing the governments of Iran and/or Syria will result in the same thing. It will also result in the people of two more countries hating the western world. I fail to see the logic in your "plan". Alternatively, you could engage them politically and economically and probably improve relations, Middle-east stability and cooperation on Iraeal-Palestine and Iraq.
73Zeppelin wrote:
Yeah, we all know how well that worked out...
That wasn't the fault of the invasion force, but the idiots in the Bush administration. Iraq's regime change could have been accomplished long before Iran could slip enough forces into the country, if there had been an all out commitment to boots on the ground.
73Zeppelin wrote:
When a country lacks a centralized and clearly-defined leadership you get anarchy: Iraq, Palestine, etc...
Or you get Germany, and Japan. The difference, I think, is that Germany and Japan were defeated, knew they were defeated, and had no allies to send them men or machines. Whether or not we can ever reproduce those circumstances in the Middle East is, of course, debatable. But the concept that nothing is accomplished by force is given the lie by history - as the Georgians or the Tibetans (or the Uighur), if you don't believe me. ;)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
but I doubt the current administration, yes Dubya, I'm talking about you, will lift a finger to do anything
With a new US President due to take office soon, with new policies and so on. I've not read any of Obama's policies regarding Israel or Palestine so I wonder if what Israel are doing now, which has the support of the present US Administration may change somewhat with a new installed US President. Is this good enough reason - the unknown - why this Israeli action is happening now as it may be difficult to do same under a new Administration. Regarding Iran and Syria, I got the impression during those Presidential debates that Obama is more willing to talk and listen. This stance might become a worry to Israel.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Is this good enough reason - the unknown - why this Israeli action is happening now as it may be difficult to do same under a new Administration.
I would hazard a guess yes. Don't forget that Israel's single biggest supporter is the US, whether its arms, money, bailouts or political pressure, even the UN, the US has used its right to Veto for Israel a great many number of times. I hope that the new administration is willing to roll-up its sleeves and break heads on both sides of the table to get them to actually work together.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Regarding Iran and Syria, I got the impression during those Presidential debates that Obama is more willing to talk and listen. This stance might become a worry to Israel.
I would hazard another guess that what you are saying is completely correct. Dubya's reign as President was not marked as one of patience and reasoning.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
The other problem is that the more civilians you kill, the more young kids grow up to continue the legacy of Hamas.
Not necessarily. Ask the Germans or Japanese.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Not necessarily. Ask the Germans or Japanese.
Good point, but I think the difference is that both the Germans and the Japanese were ruled by (basically) dictatorships. The Palestinians have no clear leadership. I don't know about Japan, but the Nazi legacy still lives on.
-
Yes, but you propose to do that by force which would simply create another circle of hatred and another cycle of radicalism and so on.
Stan Shannon wrote:
which could be handled without involving the people of the middle east at all.
Interesting. I'm reminded of how the US was funding Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda during the proxy war with Afghanistan, do you propose a similar tactic? I should hope not. Its been almost 8 years and NOTHING has been accomplished in Iraq and Afghanistan other than death and fueling [a lot more] hatred and calls to radicalism. Some solution.
Don't forget to vote if the response was helpful
Sig history "dad" Ishmail-Samuel Mustafa "There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance" Ali Ibn Abi Talib
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote: Keep it up. Fool.
I now think of you as Mr. T! - Trollslayer
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
I'm reminded of how the US was funding Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda during the proxy war with Afghanistan, do you propose a similar tactic? I should hope not. Its been almost 8 years and NOTHING has been accomplished in Iraq and Afghanistan other than death and fueling [a lot more] hatred and calls to radicalism.
Which makes the point precisely. When we try to help Islam defend itself from foriegn threats we start another cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence when we try to contend with the radicalismhatredandviolence we start another cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence. It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that the cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence is self sustaining and exists due to no external cause what so ever. There is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it or to in any way affect it, and any attempt to do so just empowers those at the center of that cycle. No, it is time to simply kill it by any means necessary. Muslims are not supermen, sooner or later they will get the point that the rest of the world simply is no longer going to tolerate their bullshit.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Mustafa Ismail Mustafa wrote:
I'm reminded of how the US was funding Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda during the proxy war with Afghanistan, do you propose a similar tactic? I should hope not. Its been almost 8 years and NOTHING has been accomplished in Iraq and Afghanistan other than death and fueling [a lot more] hatred and calls to radicalism.
Which makes the point precisely. When we try to help Islam defend itself from foriegn threats we start another cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence when we try to contend with the radicalismhatredandviolence we start another cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence. It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that the cycle of radicalismhatredandviolence is self sustaining and exists due to no external cause what so ever. There is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it or to in any way affect it, and any attempt to do so just empowers those at the center of that cycle. No, it is time to simply kill it by any means necessary. Muslims are not supermen, sooner or later they will get the point that the rest of the world simply is no longer going to tolerate their bullshit.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
The radical are small in number compares to the overwhelming numbers of peaceful moderates. But those radicals are often found occupying prominent positions be it by religious position, national and local politicals, trans-nation politicals. The moderates do not necessarily put these radicals into positions of power but maybe unable, for a variety of reasons, unable to effect either their isolation or removal from power. You must not tar with the same brush the moderates and peace lovers